Dark Age America: A Bitter Legacy

Small_government_caligula · Aug 19, 2014

Civilizations normally leave a damaged environment behind them when they fall, and ours shows every sign of following that wearily familiar pattern. The nature and severity of the ecological damage a civilization leaves behind, though, depend on two factors, one obvious, the other less so. The obvious factor derives from the nature of the technologies the civilization deployed in its heyday; the less obvious one depends on how many times those same technologies had been through the same cycle of rise and fall before the civilization under discussion got to them.

There’s an important lesson in this latter factor. Human technologies almost always start off their trajectory through time as environmental disasters looking for a spot marked X, which they inevitably find, and then have the rough edges knocked off them by centuries or millennia of bitter experience. When our species first developed the technologies that enabled hunting bands to take down big game animals, the result was mass slaughter and the extinction of entire species of megafauna, followed by famine and misery; rinse and repeat, and you get the exquisite ecological balance that most hunter-gatherer societies maintained in historic times. In much the same way, early field agriculture yielded bumper crops of topsoil loss and subsistence failure to go along with its less reliable yields of edible grain, and the hard lessons from that experience have driven the rise of more sustainable agricultural systems—a process completed in our time with the emergence of organic agricultural methods that build soil rather than depleting it.

Any brand new mode of human subsistence is thus normally cruising for a bruising, and will get it in due time at the hands of the biosphere. That’s not precisely good news for modern industrial civilization, because ours is a brand new mode of human subsistence; it’s the first human society ever to depend almost entirely on extrasomatic energy—energy, that is, that doesn’t come from human or animal muscles fueled by food crops. In my book The Ecotechnic Future, I’ve suggested that industrial civilization is simply the first and most wasteful of a new mode of human society, the technic society. Eventually, I proposed, technic societies will achieve the same precise accommodation to ecological reality that hunter-gatherer societies worked out long ago, and agricultural societies have spent the last eight thousand years or so pursuing. Unfortunately, that doesn’t help us much just now.

Modern industrial civilization, in point of fact, has been stunningly clueless in its relationship with the planetary cycles that keep us all alive. Like those early bands of roving hunters who slaughtered every mammoth they could find and then looked around blankly for something to eat, we’ve drawn down the finite stocks of fossil fuels on this planet without the least concern about what the future would bring—well, other than the occasional pious utterance of thoughtstopping mantras of the “Oh, I’m sure they’ll think of something” variety. That’s not the only thing we’ve drawn down recklessly, of course, and the impact of our idiotically short-term thinking on our long-term prospects will be among the most important forces shaping the next five centuries of North America’s future.

Let’s start with one of the most obvious: topsoil, the biologically active layer of soil that can support food crops. On average, as a result of today’s standard agricultural methods, North America’s arable land loses almost three tons of topsoil from each cultivated acre every single year. Most of the topsoil that made North America the breadbasket of the 20th century world is already gone, and at the current rate of loss, all of it will be gone by 2075. That would be bad enough if we could rely on artificial fertilizer to make up for the losses, but by 2075 that won’t be an option: the entire range of chemical fertilizers are made from nonrenewable resources—natural gas is the main feedstock for nitrate fertilizers, rock phosphate for phosphate fertilizers, and so on—and all of these are depleting fast.

Topsoil loss driven by bad agricultural practices is actually quite a common factor in the collapse of civilizations. Sea-floor cores in the waters around Greece, for example, show a spike in sediment deposition from rapidly eroding topsoil right around the end of the Mycenean civilization, and another from the latter years of the Roman Empire. If archeologists thousands of years from now try the same test, they’ll find yet another eroded topsoil layer at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, the legacy of an agricultural system that put quarterly profits ahead of the relatively modest changes that might have preserved the soil for future generations.

The methods of organic agriculture mentioned earlier could help very significantly with this problem, since those include techniques for preserving existing topsoil, and rebuilding depleted soil at a rate considerably faster than nature’s pace. To make any kind of difference, though, those methods would have to be deployed on a very broad scale, and then passed down through the difficult years ahead. Lacking that, even where desertification driven by climate change doesn’t make farming impossible, a very large part of today’s North American farm belt will likely be unable to support crops for centuries or millennia to come. Eventually, the same slow processes that replenished the soil on land scraped bare by the ice age glaciers will do the same thing to land stripped of topsoil by industrial farming, but “eventually” will not come quickly enough to spare our descendants many hungry days.

The same tune in a different key is currently being played across the world’s oceans, and as a result my readers can look forward, in the not too distant future, to tasting the last piece of seafood they will ever eat. Conservatively managed, the world’s fish stocks could have produced large yields indefinitely, but they were not conservatively managed; where regulation was attempted, political and economic pressure consistently drove catch limits above sustainable levels, and of course cheating was pervasive and the penalties for being caught were merely another cost of doing business. Fishery after fishery has accordingly collapsed, and the increasingly frantic struggle to feed seven billion hungry mouths is unlikely to leave any of those that remain intact for long.

Worse, all of this is happening in oceans that are being hammered by other aspects of our collective ecological stupidity. Global climate change, by boosting the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere, is acidifying the oceans and causing sweeping shifts in oceanic food chains. Those shifts involve winners as well as losers; where calcium-shelled diatoms and corals are suffering population declines, seaweeds and algae, which are not so sensitive to changes in the acid-alkaline balance, are thriving on the increased CO2 in the water—but the fish that feed on seaweeds and algae are not the same as those that feed on diatoms and corals, and the resulting changes are whipsawing ocean ecologies.

Close to shore, toxic effluents from human industry and agriculture are also adding to the trouble. The deep oceans, all things considered, offer sparse pickings for most saltwater creatures; the vast majority of ocean life thrives within a few hundred miles of land, where rivers, upwelling zones, and the like provide nutrients in relative abundance. We’re already seeing serious problems with toxic substances concentrating up through oceanic food chains; unless communities close to the water’s edge respond to rising sea levels with consummate care, hauling every source of toxic chemicals out of reach of the waters, that problem is only going to grow worse. Different species react differently to this or that toxin; some kind of aquatic ecosystem will emerge and thrive even in the most toxic estuaries of deindustrial North America, but it’s unlikely that those ecosystems will produce anything fit for human beings to eat, and making the attempt may not be particularly good for one’s health.

Over the long run, that, too, will right itself. Bioaccumulated toxins will end up entombed in the muck on the ocean’s floor, providing yet another interesting data point for the archeologists of the far future; food chains and ecosystems will reorganize, quite possibly in very different forms from the ones they have now. Changes in water temperature, and potentially in the patterns of ocean currents, will bring unfamiliar species into contact with one another, and living things that survive the deindustrial years in isolated refugia will expand into their former range. These are normal stages in the adaptation of ecosystems to large-scale shocks. Still, those processes of renewal take time, and the deindustrial dark ages ahead of us will be long gone before the seas are restored to biological abundance.

Barren lands and empty seas aren’t the only bitter legacies we’re leaving our descendants, of course. One of the others has received quite a bit of attention on the apocalyptic end of the peak oil blogosphere for several years now—since March 11, 2011, to be precise, when the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster got under way. Nuclear power exerts a curious magnetism on the modern mind, drawing it toward extremes in one direction or the other; the wildly unrealistic claims about its limitless potential to power the future that have been made by its supporters are neatly balanced by the wildly unrealistic claims about its limitless potential as a source of human extinction on the other. Negotiating a path between those extremes is not always an easy matter.

In both cases, though, it’s easy enough to clear away at least some of the confusion by turning to documented facts. It so happens, for instance, that no nation on Earth has ever been able to launch or maintain a nuclear power program without huge and continuing subsidies. Nuclear power never pays for itself; absent a steady stream of government handouts, it doesn’t make enough economic sense to attract enough private investment to cover its costs, much less meet the huge and so far unmet expenses of nuclear waste storage; and in the great majority of cases, the motive behind the program, and the subsidies, is pretty clearly the desire of the local government to arm itself with nuclear weapons at any cost. Thus the tired fantasy of cheap, abundant nuclear power needs to be buried alongside the Eisenhower-era propagandists who dreamed it up in the first place.

It also happens, of course, that there have been quite a few catastrophic nuclear accidents since the dawn of the atomic age just over seventy years ago, especially but not only in the former Soviet Union. Thus it’s no secret what the consequences are when a reactor melts down, or when mismanaged nuclear waste storage facilities catch fire and spew radioactive smoke across the countryside. What results is an unusually dangerous industrial accident, on a par with the sudden collapse of a hydroelectric dam or a chemical plant explosion that sends toxic gases drifting into a populated area; it differs from these mostly in that the contamination left behind by certain nuclear accidents remains dangerous for many years after it comes drifting down from the sky.

There are currently 69 operational nuclear power plants scattered unevenly across the face of North America, with 127 reactors among them; there are also 48 research reactors, most of them much smaller and less vulnerable to meltdown than the power plant reactors. Most North American nuclear power plants store spent fuel rods in pools of cooling water onsite, since the spent rods continue to give off heat and radiation and there’s no long term storage for high-level nuclear waste. Neither a reactor nor a fuel rod storage pool can be left untended for long without serious trouble, and a great many things—including natural disasters and human stupidity—can push them over into meltdown, in the case of reactors, or conflagration, in the case of spent fuel rods. In either case, or both, you’ll get a plume of toxic, highly radioactive smoke drifting in the wind, and a great many people immediately downwind will die quickly or slowly, depending on the details and the dose.

It’s entirely reasonable to predict that this is going to happen to some of those 175 reactors. In a world racked by climate change, resource depletion, economic disintegration, political and social chaos, mass movements of populations, and the other normal features of the decline and fall of a civilization and the coming of a dark age, the short straw is going to be drawn sooner or later, and serious nuclear disasters are going to happen. That doesn’t justify the claim that every one of those reactors is going to melt down catastrophically, every one of the spent-fuel storage facilities is going to catch fire, and so on—though of course that claim does make for more colorful rhetoric.

In the real world, for reasons I’ll be discussing further in this series of posts, we don’t face the kind of sudden collapse that could make all the lights go out at once. Some nations, regions, and local areas within regions will slide faster than others, or be deliberately sacrificed so that resources of one kind or another can be used somewhere else. As long as governments retain any kind of power at all, keeping nuclear facilities from adding to the ongoing list of disasters will be high on their agendas; shutting down reactors that are no longer safe to operate is one step they can certainly do, and so is hauling spent fuel rods out of the pools and putting them somewhere less immediately vulnerable.

It’s probably a safe bet that the further we go along the arc of decline and fall, the further these decommissioning exercises will stray from the optimum. I can all too easily imagine fuel rods being hauled out of their pools by condemned criminals or political prisoners, loaded on flatbed rail cars, taken to some desolate corner of the expanding western deserts, and tipped one at a time into trenches dug in the desert soil, then covered over with a few meters of dirt and left to the elements. Sooner or later the radionuclides will leak out, and that desolate place will become even more desolate, a place of rumors and legends where those who go don’t come back.

Meanwhile, the reactors and spent-fuel pools that don’t get shut down even in so cavalier a fashion will become the focal points of dead zones of a slightly different kind. The facilities themselves will be off limits for some thousands of years, and the invisible footprints left behind by the plumes of smoke and dust will be dangerous for centuries. The vagaries of deposition and erosion are impossible to predict; in areas downwind from Chernobyl or some of the less famous Soviet nuclear accidents, one piece of overgrown former farmland may be relatively safe while another a quarter hour’s walk away may still set a Geiger counter clicking at way-beyond-safe rates. Here I imagine cow skulls on poles, or some such traditional marker, warning the unwary that they stand on the edge of accursed ground.

It’s important to keep in mind that not all the accursed ground in deindustrial North America will be the result of nuclear accidents. There are already areas on the continent so heavily contaminated with toxic pollutants of less glow-in-the-dark varieties that anyone who attempts to grow food or drink the water there can count on a short life and a wretched death. As the industrial system spirals toward its end, and those environmental protections that haven’t been gutted already get flung aside in the frantic quest to keep the system going just a little bit longer, spills and other industrial accidents are very likely to become a good deal more common than they are already.

There are methods of soil and ecosystem bioremediation that can be done with very simple technologies—for example, plants that concentrate toxic metals in their tissues so it can be hauled away to a less dangerous site, and fungi that break down organic toxins—but if they’re to do any good at all, these will have to be preserved and deployed in the teeth of massive social changes and equally massive hardships. Lacking that, and it’s a considerable gamble at this point, the North America of the future will be spotted with areas where birth defects are a common cause of infant mortality and it will be rare to see anyone over the age of forty or so without the telltale signs of cancer.

There’s a bitter irony in the fact that cancer, a relatively rare disease a century and a half ago—most childhood cancers in particular were so rare that individual cases were written up in medical journals —has become the signature disease of industrial society, expanding its occurrence and death toll in lockstep with our mindless dumping of chemical toxins and radioactive waste into the environment. What, after all, is cancer? A disease of uncontrolled growth.

I sometimes wonder if our descendants in the deindustrial world will appreciate that irony. One way or another, I have no doubt that they’ll have their own opinions about the bitter legacy we’re leaving them. Late at night, when sleep is far away, I sometimes remember Ernest Thompson Seton’s heartrending 1927 prose poem “A Lament,” in which he recalled the beauty of the wild West he had known and the desolation of barbed wire and bleached bones he had seen it become. He projected the same curve of devastation forward until it rebounded on its perpetrators—yes, that would be us—and imagined the voyagers of some other nation landing centuries from now at the ruins of Manhattan, and slowly piecing together the story of a vanished people:

Their chiefs and wiser ones shall know
That here was a wastrel race, cruel and sordid,
Weighed and found wanting,
Once mighty but forgotten now.
And on our last remembrance stone,
These wiser ones will write of us:
They desolated their heritage,
They wrote their own doom.

I suspect, though, that our descendants will put things in language a good deal sharper than this. As they think back on the people of the 20th and early 21st centuries who gave them the barren soil and ravaged fisheries, the chaotic weather and rising oceans, the poisoned land and water, the birth defects and cancers that embitter their lives, how will they remember us? I think I know. I think we will be the orcs and Nazgûl of their legends, the collective Satan of their mythology, the ancient race who ravaged the earth and everything on it so they could enjoy lives of wretched excess at the future’s expense. They will remember us as evil incarnate—and from their perspective, it’s by no means easy to dispute that judgment.
Click to expand...

http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2014/08/dark-age-america-bitter-legacy.html

One thing I certainly agree with...our descendants far in the future will not remember us well at all and will spit on our memory.

Tram Law · Aug 19, 2014

Nah. They'll forget us like we've forgotten the fifties and the Korean War.

Small_government_caligula · Aug 19, 2014

Tram Law said: ↑

Nah. They';; forget us like we've forgotten the fifties and the Korean War.
Click to expand...

They will have to live in the unlivable filth we leave for them, so I doubt they will have the luxury of being as myopic, short-sighted and self-centered as us.

Dispondent · Aug 19, 2014

Small_government_caligula said: ↑

They will have to live in the unlivable filth we leave for them, so I doubt they will have the luxury of being as myopic, short-sighted and self-centered as us.
Click to expand...

If our future generations haven't figured out how to clean it up or adapt and thrive whining about us is the least of their problems...

Bluespade · Aug 19, 2014

What do you want dude? We have the most regulated environment in the world. We have a declining population all over the developed world. Seems like you are just screaming more for the sake of screaming more.

Small_government_caligula said: ↑

They will have to live in the unlivable filth we leave for them, so I doubt they will have the luxury of being as myopic, short-sighted and self-centered as us.
Click to expand...

Small_government_caligula · Aug 19, 2014

Dispondent said: ↑

If our future generations haven't figured out how to clean it up or adapt and thrive whining about us is the least of their problems...
Click to expand...

You should probably read the article I posted before commenting.

Small_government_caligula · Aug 19, 2014

Bluespade said: ↑

What do you want dude? We have the most regulated environment in the world. We have a declining population all over the developed world. Seems like you are just screaming more for the sake of screaming more.
Click to expand...

You should also read the article I posted, and not make it into your fantasy about me railing against capitalism and demanding big government. Can you please read the damn article before completely condemning my premise?

Brtblutwo · Aug 19, 2014

Small_government_caligula said: ↑

They will have to live in the unlivable filth we leave for them, so I doubt they will have the luxury of being as myopic, short-sighted and self-centered as us.
Click to expand...

Conservatives and neoconservatives are notoriously shortsighted, their refusal to face the truth about unsustainable trickle down economics, mankind's influence on climate change, and the need for a rapid switch to alternative energy, prove this. Just to name a few issues.

Dispondent · Aug 19, 2014

Small_government_caligula said: ↑

You should probably read the article I posted before commenting.
Click to expand...

We've all seen the sky is falling narrative before, and this a bit more extreme than most. Future generations will be just fine, they'll adapt and develop the technologies they need to survive...

Brtblutwo · Aug 19, 2014

Dispondent said: ↑

We've all seen the sky is falling narrative before, and this a bit more extreme than most. Future generations will be just fine, they'll adapt and develop the technologies they need to survive...
Click to expand...

Like most right-wingers, you really have no idea what is happening around you.

Dispondent · Aug 19, 2014

Brtblutwo said: ↑

Like most right-wingers, you really have no idea what is happening around you.
Click to expand...

Well if I had the insights left wingers were singing not so long ago the ocean would be 20 feet higher now and millions would have perished... You people buy into every ounce of propaganda that comes out that's doom and gloom and save sweet Gaia...

AmericanNationalist · Aug 19, 2014

Brtblutwo said: ↑

Like most right-wingers, you really have no idea what is happening around you.
Click to expand...

Every day that we're alive is another day refuting the "We're screwed" mantra.

Tram Law · Aug 19, 2014

Bluespade said: ↑

What do you want dude? We have the most regulated environment in the world. We have a declining population all over the developed world. Seems like you are just screaming more for the sake of screaming more.
Click to expand...

Hey guy, on Halloween last year the seventh billion person was born. According to this world population clock, there have been over 254 million more people since then.

So I don't think there is any sort of depopulation going on.

Here's the clock:

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

Small_government_caligula · Aug 19, 2014

Brtblutwo said: ↑

Conservatives and neoconservatives are notoriously shortsighted, their refusal to face the truth about unsustainable trickle down economics, mankind's influence on climate change, and the need for a rapid switch to alternative energy, prove this. Just to name a few issues.
Click to expand...

Well, the point of the article is actually that modern industrial society is still a relatively new stage in human development, and right now it is in its stage of uncontrolled growth. Taken to its logical conclusion, uncontrolled growth eventually hits a brick wall. Trickle-down economics and deregulation and such are attempts to keep everything going for just a little longer, but since no one can currently envision or articulate a sustainable vision for industrial mass societies, there are no realistic political alternatives. Hence you have "centrist" Republican and Democrats basically agreeing on everything related to economics. The point of the article is mainly this: "Any brand new mode of human subsistence is thus normally cruising for a bruising, and will get it in due time at the hands of the biosphere." I thought it was interesting and worth a think about.

Bluespade · Aug 19, 2014

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/10/08/0813_fastest_shrinking_countries/

Tram Law said: ↑

Hey guy, on Halloween last year the seventh billion person was born. According to this world population clock, there have been over 254 million more people since then.

So I don't think there is any sort of depopulation going on.

Here's the clock:

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
Click to expand...

Brtblutwo · Aug 19, 2014

Dispondent said: ↑

Well if I had the insights left wingers were singing not so long ago the ocean would be 20 feet higher now and millions would have perished... You people buy into every ounce of propaganda that comes out that's doom and gloom and save sweet Gaia...
Click to expand...

You can cherry pick whatever you want, but if climate change keeps western states in a severe drought condition, especially California, you will be lucky to find food. Despite your myopic confidence, the right-wingers will suffer along with the rest of the insignificant citizens when scarcity of food puts it beyond the means of average Americans. The very rich and the military necessary to protect them from the starving masses will receive priority. The farmlands of Texas are also drying up. So, keep your head buried in the sand and keep swallowing every lie FOX News tells you.

Conservatives and neoconservatives have no concept of what it takes to feed over 300 million people.

Dispondent · Aug 19, 2014

Brtblutwo said: ↑

You can cherry pick whatever you want, but if climate change keeps western states in a severe drought condition, especially California, you will be lucky to find food. Despite your myopic confidence, the right-wingers will suffer along with the rest of the insignificant citizens when scarcity of food puts it beyond the means of average Americans. The very rich and the military necessary to protect them from the starving masses will receive priority. The farmlands of Texas are also drying up. So, keep your head buried in the sand and keep swallowing every lie FOX News tells you.

Conservatives and neoconservatives have no concept of what it takes to feed over 300 million people.
Click to expand...

Moving right along straight to the class warfare narrative, how utterly predictable...

Doom and gloom is all you see and all you want to hear about, its laughable...

Tram Law · Aug 19, 2014

Bluespade said: ↑

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/10/08/0813_fastest_shrinking_countries/
Click to expand...

Thank you for the link. You said that the human population was devlining all over the world. That same article says that only in certain countries is the population decreasing while the world population will reach over 8 billion people by 2050.

Brtblutwo · Aug 19, 2014

Dispondent said: ↑

Moving right along straight to the class warfare narrative, how utterly predictable...

Doom and gloom is all you see and all you want to hear about, its laughable...
Click to expand...

And you are whistling in the dark, hoping things won't get too bad before you die, and to he11 with the future generations.

Dispondent · Aug 19, 2014

Brtblutwo said: ↑

And you are whistling in the dark, hoping things won't get too bad before you die, and to he11 with the future generations.
Click to expand...

Hardly, I just don't fall for every worst case scenario like its a sure thing...

Brtblutwo · Aug 19, 2014

AmericanNationalist said: ↑

Every day that we're alive is another day refuting the "We're screwed" mantra.
Click to expand...

Eventually, luck will run out. The question is, when?

Durandal · Aug 19, 2014

Small_government_caligula said: ↑

Well, the point of the article is actually that modern industrial society is still a relatively new stage in human development, and right now it is in its stage of uncontrolled growth. Taken to its logical conclusion, uncontrolled growth eventually hits a brick wall. Trickle-down economics and deregulation and such are attempts to keep everything going for just a little longer, but since no one can currently envision or articulate a sustainable vision for industrial mass societies, there are no realistic political alternatives. Hence you have "centrist" Republican and Democrats basically agreeing on everything related to economics. The point of the article is mainly this: "Any brand new mode of human subsistence is thus normally cruising for a bruising, and will get it in due time at the hands of the biosphere." I thought it was interesting and worth a think about.
Click to expand...

Economically speaking, I think our present system is bound to fail eventually. It's the debt and interest that will likely bring it about.

But technologically, we're in a very new situation indeed. No failed civilisation of the past had science as we have it, nor the level of communication we enjoy.. I think people need to pay more attention to just how different modern times are from the past before attempting to draw up parallels to the past. We are not Rome in very many ways indeed.

fifthofnovember · Aug 19, 2014

Small_government_caligula said: ↑

http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2014/08/dark-age-america-bitter-legacy.html

One thing I certainly agree with...our descendants far in the future will not remember us well at all and will spit on our memory.
Click to expand...

Talk about having no faith in human ingenuity. The two main points of this article, topsoil and nuclear dangers, can both be dealt with. Right off the top of my head, aquaponics (a symbiotic combination of hydroponics and aquaculture) and thorium reactors supplemented by wind, solar, and hydroelectric have the potential to feed and power the people of the future. A dark age? Please. We have just entered the information age, and the combined brainpower of unprecendented information sharing will provide solutions that smaller groups would not come up with on their own, in a snowball effect. Nowhere in this article is it mentioned just why we are all supposed to get stupid and lose the ability to adapt. The "Dark Age" is just assumed, and that is what makes this article a strawman.

vino909 · Aug 19, 2014

future generations will know NOTHING about the past, because the way things are going, they won't be able to read.

garyd · Aug 19, 2014

Small_government_caligula said: ↑

http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2014/08/dark-age-america-bitter-legacy.html

One thing I certainly agree with...our descendants far in the future will not remember us well at all and will spit on our memory.
Click to expand...

It is every bit as likely that they will think of this as a golden age and wish to figure out how to emulate it. Those stuck with a Luddite world of the sort your average environmentalist imagines seldom enjoy it.

Log in or Sign up

Dark Age America: A Bitter Legacy

Small_government_caligula Banned

Tram Law Banned

Small_government_caligula Banned

Dispondent Well-Known Member Past Donor

Bluespade Banned

Small_government_caligula Banned

Small_government_caligula Banned

Brtblutwo New Member

Dispondent Well-Known Member Past Donor

Brtblutwo New Member

Dispondent Well-Known Member Past Donor

AmericanNationalist Well-Known Member

Tram Law Banned

Small_government_caligula Banned

Bluespade Banned

Brtblutwo New Member

Dispondent Well-Known Member Past Donor

Tram Law Banned

Brtblutwo New Member

Dispondent Well-Known Member Past Donor

Brtblutwo New Member

Durandal Well-Known Member Donor

fifthofnovember Well-Known Member

vino909 Well-Known Member

garyd Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Dark Age America: A Bitter Legacy

Small_government_caligula Banned

Tram Law Banned

Small_government_caligula Banned

Dispondent Well-Known Member Past Donor

Bluespade Banned

Small_government_caligula Banned

Small_government_caligula Banned

Brtblutwo New Member

Dispondent Well-Known Member Past Donor

Brtblutwo New Member

Dispondent Well-Known Member Past Donor

AmericanNationalist Well-Known Member

Tram Law Banned

Small_government_caligula Banned

Bluespade Banned

Brtblutwo New Member

Dispondent Well-Known Member Past Donor

Tram Law Banned

Brtblutwo New Member

Dispondent Well-Known Member Past Donor

Brtblutwo New Member

Durandal Well-Known Member Donor

fifthofnovember Well-Known Member

vino909 Well-Known Member

garyd Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches